If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Pardon me for saying this. But, this may be the most inane comment I've ever seen on here. Let me get this straight. Lets overpay and possess a group of underachieving buffoons who don't even run to first base, then lose.

No I was making comments to the people who have been screaming every day to spend money.

Well after 2006 we had a HUGE payroll every year and failed at the end. Well I guess it is OK to lose games as long as we spend money because that seems to be the only way some people are happy around here.

Because if you read a lot of the complaints no one ever brings up winning. It always goes back to spending money because it is New York.

No I was making comments to the people who have been screaming every day to spend money.

Well after 2006 we had a HUGE payroll every year and failed at the end. Well I guess it is OK to lose games as long as we spend money because that seems to be the only way some people are happy around here.

Because if you read a lot of the complaints no one ever brings up winning. It always goes back to spending money because it is New York.

How does spending money not pay off? Look at the teams that have over $100,000,000 payrolls.

We are proof that it happens. The problem was our window closed. Some players became injury risks, some players under performed, and others just didn't show up. Unless you are a team that cam go out every year and plug the next hole you are set up for failure. Look at the Phillies and Redsox. Phillies traded off pieces and haven't filled those holes. Redsox had to trade half their team.

When most positions on your team are filled with players over 30 and from FA that isn't a long term plan.

2nd generation contracts: I keep hearing that Sandy doesn't like to hand out second generation contracts. He obviously made an exception in David Wright's case (to avoid full blown fan mutiny, most likely), but he doesn't like to give them out in general. My question is this: if he doesn't give out 2nd generation contracts, then does that mean that when our payroll drops below a certain figure, say, $50m, that it will never go back over that total? How can you have a competitive payroll when you don't give out 2nd generation contracts? And how can you have a competitive team doing this? Does this mean that, for example, when Wheeler has only 1 year left, that Sandy's philosophy is going to be "let's try to flip him for a Syndergaard type prospect and a throw-in"? That sort of thing? I just don't get it. Because people keep saying our payroll will increase, but how will that happen without 2nd generation contracts?

As an aside, people are always saying that you overpay when you write a 2nd generation contract, but I don't see how that is the case. Yes, you can get a higher WAR per dollar output from players in your farm system as opposed to big name free agents. But it seems to me, the extra price you pay for these big free agents is some reliability. There's always a chance that a player will be a bust (ala Jason Bay) but it's less likely than the chance that a mere prospect will bust.

More about payroll: If the Mets truly expect to have cash to spend next off-season, then why couldn't they sign a player this off-season and backload a little extra money of the contract for next year and the year after? Or do something like that?

We're told that the Mets are waiting until 2014 to make a splash in free agency, as we watch them refuse to sign any MLB free agent (only team that hasn't signed one).

But here's the thing: we're missing 3 outfielders. Plus perhaps a 2B or if you want to go overboard, a SS as well. At the very least, we're missing 3 outfielders.

That outfield situation doesn't get any better for a LONG time. The closest impact bat we have on the horizon is Nimmo, and he's several years away at least.

So in order to be competitive, you're going to need 3 MLB quality outfielders. If the Mets intend on filling ALL of those holes next year, is that really a wise strategy? There ARE other teams in the league, other teams that ALSO need outfielders, and there aren't 20+ good outfielders to go around in free agency. So you ARE going to miss out on SOME of your targets in free agency no matter what you do. That's why I can't understand the idea of trying to fill these holes in one year...

Far better idea would have been to snatch up ONE of those guys this year and then see what's available next year. What Sandy is doing (if this is what he is doing), well, it seems almost contradictory. He's basically backing himself into a corner by not filling any of our needs this year.

These are just my humble thoughts, I would not be surprised if I'm wrong about a few things here, these are just my thoughts..

The answer is simple. We are not competing in 2014. Whoever believes that is being foolish. If we're lucky we'll compete in 2015 so we should be active the next 2 offseasons

Dumb.... we're doing a great job rebuilding. At this point we'll have to wait and see if our young guys turn out good, and we could have a nice foundation of Wright, Ike, d'Arnaud, Harvey, Wheeler, Niese, with Syndergaard joining in a couple yrs... I'm confident if these guys are all good-very good, we'll make some decent signings to help the team.

What we've been doing hasn't been working, obviously.... let's try this and see what happens.

All those contracts were stupid and for average players. Last top free agent we signed was Beltran and that worked out pretty good with nearly winning it all in 2006 and eventually flipping him for Wheeler.

I'm not saying to go out and sign every player because we're no where near being able to compete but assuming both Harvey and Wheeler pan out and TDA is solid we should be looking to bring in at least 2-3 high profile veterans...like we did with Beltran and trading for Delgado

1) The Wilpons aren't broke or anywhere close to it. They are in fact billionaire real estate developers. They can afford to keep the amount of money they pay themselves low during the whole Madoff thing but I believe were precluded by new rules of putting their own personal money into the team.

2) Their instructions to SA were reduce costs and retool for an 1980s style run based on a strong starting staff and a core lineup plus farm system depth to make three for one upgrade trades when they get close enough. Figure out who is worth keeping for the long haul and start throwing out the trash. If Duda blossoms into a 30 90 .270 guy who can hold down LF he stays for a few years until a farm product or star FA comes along. Let's see what Nieuwenhuis can do over 400 ABs platooning with Cowgill. Find some warm body to play RF---Hairston is still the best fit and now Juan Rivera is option 2---or make a big trade to get Justin Upton and add a core player to the team...we shall see what happens in the next two weeks.

3) Let Tejada and Murphy stay up the middle but keep an eye open for a better fielding secondbaseman with speed if one comes along. Murphy is a good fifth infielder for us, a starter on a B team, preferably at 3B...he is one of those square pegs I keep referring to. I like a deal involving Murphy in any trade for JUpton as they need a 3Bman and have four starting outfielders plus Adam Eaton and some kid named AJ Pollock ready at AAA...sounds like a good trading partner to me....see my next post on trading with Arizona

4) Find a true leadoff hitter---but don't overpay now if there are none available. I still like Bourn but not if he costs us the #11 pick to ATL...trade for Crisp? Are one of the AZ kids a leadoff type?

1) The Wilpons aren't broke or anywhere close to it. They are in fact billionaire real estate developers. They can afford to keep the amount of money they pay themselves low during the whole Madoff thing but I believe were precluded by new rules of putting their own personal money into the team.

I agree the money is there. The real estate crisis seems to be over now. Since Sterling is private I'm not sure how much it's worth. I do know the Wilpons skim a bunch of money from the Mets through SNY being a separate company. SNY collects a fortune for Mets television rights and the Mets get a fraction of that. The Wilpons keep borrowing hundreds of millions of dollars from SNY to pay themselves dividends.

Meanwhile they won't spend a cent on the team. But nobody who defends their refusal to spend has answered these questions I asked earlier...

1) Why does signing players to fill gaping holes mean they can't also draft well and develop talent or make other deals for prospects? Why exactly is it a rule the team has to suck year after year on zero budget while developing talent in-house?

2) Why do some assume every free agent is going to be a flop? If Sandy is so smart shouldn't he be able to sign free agents that perform decently? It seems most other teams are able to do this.

They have deferred deals etc and lost RA, gave DW a low salary next year, and apparently the explanation is that it will give them flex, then they don't spend, isn't the reality really that the 'flex' is being used to ensure a lower payroll for next year?

I agree the money is there. The real estate crisis seems to be over now. Since Sterling is private I'm not sure how much it's worth. I do know the Wilpons skim a bunch of money from the Mets through SNY being a separate company. SNY collects a fortune for Mets television rights and the Mets get a fraction of that. The Wilpons keep borrowing hundreds of millions of dollars from SNY to pay themselves dividends.

1) The Wilpons aren't broke or anywhere close to it. They are in fact billionaire real estate developers. They can afford to keep the amount of money they pay themselves low during the whole Madoff thing but I believe were precluded by new rules of putting their own personal money into the team.

2) Their instructions to SA were reduce costs and retool for an 1980s style run based on a strong starting staff and a core lineup plus farm system depth to make three for one upgrade trades when they get close enough. Figure out who is worth keeping for the long haul and start throwing out the trash. If Duda blossoms into a 30 90 .270 guy who can hold down LF he stays for a few years until a farm product or star FA comes along. Let's see what Nieuwenhuis can do over 400 ABs platooning with Cowgill. Find some warm body to play RF---Hairston is still the best fit and now Juan Rivera is option 2---or make a big trade to get Justin Upton and add a core player to the team...we shall see what happens in the next two weeks.

3) Let Tejada and Murphy stay up the middle but keep an eye open for a better fielding secondbaseman with speed if one comes along. Murphy is a good fifth infielder for us, a starter on a B team, preferably at 3B...he is one of those square pegs I keep referring to. I like a deal involving Murphy in any trade for JUpton as they need a 3Bman and have four starting outfielders plus Adam Eaton and some kid named AJ Pollock ready at AAA...sounds like a good trading partner to me....see my next post on trading with Arizona

4) Find a true leadoff hitter---but don't overpay now if there are none available. I still like Bourn but not if he costs us the #11 pick to ATL...trade for Crisp? Are one of the AZ kids a leadoff type?

With a minor league career .456 OBP and 44 SBs this year, do you think Adam Eaton profiles as a leadoff hitter? If there's any way we could pull off a trade for Eaton, Sandy should do it. They need a 3B? Give 'em Murphy, Flores and Lutz. lol Throw in Aderlin while we're at it.

You don't know anything of the kind. The article you linked to is 100% speculative. The author states, "perhaps...etc" and the headline reads, "...may pay themselves..."

Wow. You know how to use colored fonts and boldface type. Cool.

I'll give them a try, too. Here's a quote from the article.

"The audacity of the owners to pocket money while chopping payroll should not come as a surprise to their fans. Two years ago SNY paid its owners $239 million in dividends."

So... I do know the Wilpons skim a bunch of money from the Mets through SNY being a separate company.

Now how about answering the questions the pro-Wilpon group here continues to avoid?

1) Why does signing players to fill gaping holes mean they can't also draft well and develop talent or make other deals for prospects? Why exactly is it a rule the team has to suck year after year on zero budget while developing talent in-house?

2) Why do some assume every free agent is going to be a flop? If Sandy is so smart shouldn't he be able to sign free agents that perform decently? It seems most other teams are able to do this.

With a minor league career .456 OBP and 44 SBs this year, do you think Adam Eaton profiles as a leadoff hitter? If there's any way we could pull off a trade for Eaton, Sandy should do it. They need a 3B? Give 'em Murphy, Flores and Lutz. lol Throw in Aderlin while we're at it.

When you say "skim" it implies something unethical. If monies are distributed through legitimate channels, there is nothing unethical about it.

You still do not "know". The amount is attributed to a "source". The source might be a good one, or it might not be, so...you do not "know". You can believe, but you cannot "know" because you have no verifiable evidence. It is reasonable to believe those monies never went in ownership's pockets.

Those dividends -- according to your source -- came from borrowed monies in 2010, and not from profits. Nor are these annual dividends. It was a one-time payout. Furthermore, they are a debt, and not profit. It's reasonable to believe the monies were used to payoff other debts, to maintain liquidity, and did not go in ownership's pockets as you routinely state.

Ownership lost significant monies post Madoff, and apparently the real estate market was not so lucrative either. Ownership also had to borrow monies from Major League Baseball. Accusations that ownership is rolling in money are not logical. Ownership is in recovery.

1) Why does signing players to fill gaping holes mean they can't also draft well and develop talent or make other deals for prospects? Why exactly is it a rule the team has to suck year after year on zero budget while developing talent in-house?

2) Why do some assume every free agent is going to be a flop? If Sandy is so smart shouldn't he be able to sign free agents that perform decently? It seems most other teams are able to do this.

I think they could draft better, but I by no means think they draft poorly. Their IFA signings have been very useful and that is definitely a strength. It is more beneficial to suck while rebuilding because you accumulate higher draft choices in each round. Our farm system has dramtically improved, and with the Beltran/Dickey trades we have aqcuired top end talent and upside.

There is no point of spending money when the team isn't going to win. An 85 win team does not please me, we need to build a strong core of young players and then add the veteran pieces nessesary via FA/trade market when the time is right to put us over the top.

When you say "skim" it implies something unethical. If monies are distributed through legitimate channels, there is nothing unethical about it.

You still do not "know". The amount is attributed to a "source". The source might be a good one, or it might not be, so...you do not "know". You can believe, but you cannot "know" because you have no verifiable evidence. It is reasonable to believe those monies never went in ownership's pockets.

Those dividends -- according to your source -- came from borrowed monies in 2010, and not from profits. Nor are these annual dividends. It was a one-time payout. Furthermore, they are a debt, and not profit. It's reasonable to believe the monies were used to payoff other debts, to maintain liquidity, and did not go in ownership's pockets as you routinely state.

Ownership lost significant monies post Madoff, and apparently the real estate market was not so lucrative either. Ownership also had to borrow monies from Major League Baseball. Accusations that ownership is rolling in money are not logical. Ownership is in recovery.

Equity on SNY keeps rising and the Wilpons take advantage by shifting debt to it and paying themselves cash dividends.

The article also mentions SNY's EBITDA (earnings after most expenses) is $175 million a year. On top of this SNY pays the Mets another $70 million for broadcast rights. On top of this the Mets get 1/30th of MLB's new $1.5 billion a year network contract. This is another $50 million a year.

None of this includes ballpark revenue.

All this money has to be going somewhere. If it's not going into the team it's going into the Wilpons pockets.

Originally Posted by YoungStuna28

I think they could draft better, but I by no means think they draft poorly. Their IFA signings have been very useful and that is definitely a strength. It is more beneficial to suck while rebuilding because you accumulate higher draft choices in each round. Our farm system has dramtically improved, and with the Beltran/Dickey trades we have aqcuired top end talent and upside.

There is no point of spending money when the team isn't going to win. An 85 win team does not please me, we need to build a strong core of young players and then add the veteran pieces nessesary via FA/trade market when the time is right to put us over the top.

10 teams make the playoffs nowadays. The Mets have some good pieces. If they sign an outfield they could be interesting to watch. Regardless, the idea that if a team isn't a championship contender they're excused from making any effort to improve at the Major League level is nuts.

MLB is not the NBA or NFL where moving up a few positions in the draft makes a difference. Look at the list of perennial contenders and you'll find very few have gotten most of their key players by tanking whole seasons.

StoicSentry's analysis, that it'll be impossible to acquire all the pieces you need in a single off-season, that it needs to be done over several off-seasons and some will need to be free agent signings, makes more sense.